1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2021

PRESENT

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE

AND

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE

R.E.R.A. APPEAL. NO.19 OF 2021

BETWEEN:

SHRIVISION TOWERS PRIVATE LIMITED

NO.31, 2ND MAIN, T CHOWDAIAH ROAD

SADASHIVANAGAR, BENGALURU-560080

REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED SIGNATORY

SRI. NAVEEN KUMAR J.

... APPELLANT

(BY MR. JOSEPH ANTHONY, ADV.,)

AND:

1.

MR. AMIT PAL

S/O MR. SHAIVRAM PAL

AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS

R/A FLAT NO.8038, TOWER 8

PRESTIGE TRANQUILITY APARTMENT

NEAR BOMMENAHALLI

BENGALURU-560064.

2.

MRS. SOUTRIMA PAL

D/O MR. SIBSANKAR NANDI

AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS

R/AT FLAT NO.3E, BLOCK-4

CLUBTOWN ESTATE

87 DUM DUM ROAD, KALKATTA

WEST BENGAL-700074.

2

3.

THE ADJUDICATING OFFICER

THE KARNATAKA REAL ESTATE REGULATORY AUTHORITY

2ND FLOOR, SILVER JUBILEE BLOCK

UNITY BUILDING, CSI COMPOUND

3RD CROSS, MISSION ROAD

BANGALORE-560027.

... RESPONDENTS

(BY MR. M.D. RAJKUMAR, ADV., FOR C/R1 & R2)

- - -

THIS R.E.R.A. APPEAL IS FILED SECTION 58 OF THE

KARNATAKA REAL ESTATE (REGULATION AND DEVELOPMENT)

ACT, 2016, PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS PERTAINING TO K-

REAT APPEAL NO.75/2020 ON THE FILE OF THE K-REAT AND

ISSUE AN ORDER OR DIRECTION TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED

JUDGMENT

DATED

MARCH

26

2021

IN

APPEAL

(K-REAT

No.75/2020. IN THE ALTERNATIVE, REMAND THE MATTER TO THE

FILE OF THE K-REAT, THEREBY DIRECTING THE K-REAT TO

PERMIT THE APPELLANT HEREIN TO ADVANCE ARGUMENTS AND

PROSECUTE THE SAID APPEAL WITHOUT THE REQUIREMENT TO

MAKE THE DEPOSIT OF SEVENTY PER CENT (70%) OF THE

AMOUNT AS AWRDED BY RESPONDENT NO.3 TO RESPONDENT

NO.1 AND 2 & ETC.

THIS R.E.R.A. APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS

DAY, ALOK ARADHE J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT

This appeal is admitted on the following substantial

question of law:

B. Whether Section 43(5) and the proviso

thereto

mandates

a

promoter/developer

preferring an appeal under Section 44 of the

Act to only advance arguments and further

3

prosecute the appeal upon the payment of the

seventy per cent (70%) of the amount

awarded

by

the

Ld.

Adjudicating Officer

(Respondent No.3 herein) under the provisions

of the Act?

2. When the matter was taken up today, learned

counsel for the parties fairly submitted that the aforesaid

substantial question of law has been answered by the

Supreme

Court

in

'NEWTECH

PROMOTERS

AND

DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD. Vs. STATE OF UP AND OTHERS'

2021 SCC ONLINE SC 1044. It is further submitted by the

learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant be

granted four weeks time to deposit the amount as directed

by the Appellate Tribunal and the appeal be remitted for

hearing on merits. The aforesaid submission has not been

fairly opposed by the learned counsel for the respondent

Nos.1 and 2.

3. In view of the aforesaid judgment of the Supreme

Court, the substantial question of law is answered against the

appellant and in favour of the respondent Nos.1 and 2.

4

However, in the facts of the case, judgment dated

26.03.2021 passed by the Appellate Tribunal is set aside and

it is directed that in case appellant deposits the amount as

directed by the Appellate Tribunal within a period of four

weeks from today, the Tribunal shall hear the appeal on

merits expeditiously.

Accordingly, the appeal is disposed of.

Sd/-

JUDGE

Sd/-

JUDGE

RV